Tis the season...deja vu anyone?

[Betty]

Sign is gone now!

[Prudence]

Aside from being constantly amazed at the number of people in this world who think that being mean-spirited is the way to win converts, I was wondering if there were going to be pagans who were put off by solistice references.

[Betty]

I think that the other sign - was it a bus billboard - that referenced being good for goodness sake sort of think might be less inflamatory.

On the other hand, I find it comforting to not feel like the only one and having a public display professing that I'm not alone in feeling that way, is sort of cool.

But does the nativity scene offend me? No. In general, I don't really care much about it at all.

[Ghoulish Delight]

While I might generally agree with Moonliner, I doubt either of you have been been first-hand targets of religious intolerance. I might agree that there's a point where sensitivity becomes over sensitivity, but it's easy to say, "It's just tradition, get over it," when you've never had a religious slur thrown your way.

[Moonliner]

Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight

While I might generally agree with Moonliner, I doubt either of you have been been first-hand targets of religious intolerance. I might agree that there's a point where sensitivity becomes over sensitivity, but it's easy to say, "It's just tradition, get over it," when you've never had a religious slur thrown your way.

I'm not saying hatred and intolerance don't exist I'm just saying they are not hiding in every Santa and Nativity scene as some would lead us to believe.

In a Christian society you are going to see more Christian symbols, just as in a Jewish state you would find more Jewish symbols.

[Ghoulish Delight]

Originally Posted by Moonliner

In a Christian society you are going to see more Christian symbols, just as in a Jewish state you would find more Jewish symbols.

Agreed. But there's a line that can be drawn, and in this country that line is at the governmental level. If the government is funding it, I think it's wrong.

[Sir Dillon]

Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight

Agreed. But there's a line that can be drawn, and in this country that line is at the governmental level. If the government is funding it, I think it's wrong.

If?

The Governor of Washington State was merely allowing equal access to the Capitol to the atheist display as it did the religious display.

There is NO government funding involved.

S.D.

[Ghoulish Delight]

Originally Posted by Sir Dillon

If?

The Governor of Washington State was merely allowing equal access to the Capitol to the atheist display as it did the religious display.

There is NO government funding involved.

S.D.

I never claimed there was. I was simply discussing with Moonliner where I draw the line on religious displays on public property.

[Betty]

We traditionally did things like discriminate and that doesn't make it ok.

[Alex]

I do there there is value in the tradition argument, and even when of religious origin, a traditional thing carries some secular value.

I think that argument, however, was shredded when their were lawsuits charging that the traditional thing was not sufficiently religious and therefore more overt religious symbolism should be allowed (attempts to require calling it a Christmas tree rather than holiday tree and then to add a nativity scene).